James Brent

Was pleased to see someone come in a put together a rescue plan for the club but am still not convinced that it was either this or nothing.
The news today just increases the idea that he is in it for the property, along with the Millbay project and the already acquired Pavillions (where I have recently found out that you cannot buy tickets there, at an ever increasing amount, but have to buy them through the ticket touts that are ticketmaster)
Is he a fan? Maybe of the football and definately of the property

That's my understanding GOB.

and all *insert amount here* will all be paid back to the GT's and Brent from the profit made by the catering shop and the letting of a conference room in the new 6,000 seater Grandstand?

knecht wrote:

I don't think you can tell if he's good for the club yet. I like some of the things he's done. I dislike others. He has certainly made mistakes - and apologised for some of them.

[b]Whether or not he was the only realistic bidder in town and whether or not other better bidders were put off is unlikely to be anything to do with him[/b].You really think so? I suppose you think the dynamic duo got their privileges just because JB likes them? As it is, a rich man saw the opportunity to become richer by 'saving' Argyle. That's the way of the world. For me the best to be said is that in this situation we could all be winners.

As for paying the staff off quicker - we are told that the cost of paying off ALL staff more quickly (including players - that was a stipulation of the deal that ALL staff were to be treated equally by Mr Brent) would have been prohibitive. If you look back you will see that JB was originally going to pay all the staff & FC debt off upfront, I believe he changed his mind when Ridsdale told him there was a way around it.Say what you like about Mr Newell and the GTs (and I can never understand why the GTs get lumped in the same category), they are hastening the repayment of money owed to the ordinary workers at HP.

Incidentally, I see this morning that there is now an intention to add a further development "to the east" of HP. An educational facility carries more cache than an hotel but it just goes on doesn't it?! LINKY

As for the football club being able to keep the profits from non-matchday use of the facilities in the new stand, who's going to use it for non matchday events? "Ooh, my daughter's getting married. Shall we have the reception in that posh new hotel with views over Central Park and the sea? No, lets go for the Aviva lounge stuck under the stand at Home Park, complete with stunning views of the Barn Park end"

More importantly, who is going to use it on match days, will there be six thousand less in the Lyndhurst?

GreenSam wrote:

If he went we'd be done in for. He's covering our losses, which I imagine makes the debt go even further into the future crippling us with debt if it is leveraged against the club which isn't good at all. BUT at least we're solvent. We're going to be paying off a lot of debt for a long time which is crap, but how likely are we to find someone who was going to take on this club without leveraging it.

Nothing against you Sam.. You raise a good point.

Brents great advocates make it seem like he is doing us all a favour. Why shouldn't he chip in the money to keep PAFC going - after all it is his 'business' and nobody elses! He alone stands to make all the profit.

Grovehill wrote:

......

As for the football club being able to keep the profits from non-matchday use of the facilities in the new stand, who's going to use it for non matchday events? "Ooh, my daughter's getting married. Shall we have the reception in that posh new hotel with views over Central Park and the sea? No, lets go for the Aviva lounge stuck under the stand at Home Park, complete with stunning views of the Barn Park end"

I have no experience of running a football club. I have no idea if you have. I have never run a business. I have no idea if you have.

I have no idea of Mr Brent's intention to model Argyle's commercial development on Exeter Chief's is actually viable. That is his avowed intention. In my opinion, he really didn't "get" what football is actually about. He is on a steep learning curve. These plans may be pipe-dreams. They may not.

I do know that Fleetwood's owner has said that one of his main finance streams comes from the commercial development of the club's facilities. There have been so many football clubs close to going out of business that this may be something that all clubs in the lower tiers will have to look at more closely. If he sets up his hotel to be in competition with the facilities on offer in the grand-stand that's planned then that will speak more volumes about his intentions.

GOB wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Isn't the plan for the club (fans) to repay the GT's at the end of all this? Meaning in effect the fans will have paid twice?

And what will the GT's do with that money? That is a question that never seems to get answered?

So not only will the club have to pay back Brent for his loan, it will also have to pay back the GT's as well - Have I got this right?

How much is owed to the GT's so far then?

Firstly it has been a clearly stated aim of the GTs that the repaid monies will go back into Community projects, including but not restricted to, The Youth department, The Ladies Team and the Disability Team.

Secondly the monies loaned by the GTs has been raised by donations, including ticket sales to GT events, auctions and raffles. No0bopdy is forced to buy any of these things - if fans want to go to a Fanfest, buy a raffle ticket or an auction item that is their choice. It in no way means that all fans are paying twice. JB is payinmg the GTs back at the same rate that he is paying the other owed wages (player wages). It is against all FL rules for him to repay behind the scenes staff back at a faster rate than players.

I don't know the current balance owed to the GTs.

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

GOB wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Isn't the plan for the club (fans) to repay the GT's at the end of all this? Meaning in effect the fans will have paid twice?

And what will the GT's do with that money? That is a question that never seems to get answered?

So not only will the club have to pay back Brent for his loan, it will also have to pay back the GT's as well - Have I got this right?

How much is owed to the GT's so far then?

Firstly it has been a clearly stated aim of the GTs that the repaid monies will go back into Community projects, including but not restricted to, The Youth department, The Ladies Team and the Disability Team.

Secondly the monies loaned by the GTs has been raised by donations, including ticket sales to GT events, auctions and raffles. No0bopdy is forced to buy any of these things - if fans want to go to a Fanfest, buy a raffle ticket or an auction item that is their choice. It in no way means that all fans are paying twice. JB is payinmg the GTs back at the same rate that he is paying the other owed wages (player wages). It is against all FL rules for him to repay behind the scenes staff back at a faster rate than players.

I don't know the current balance owed to the GTs.

From what I understand, all the monies raised is in the name of speeding up repayments of wages owed to the non-playing staff who worked tirelessly to help save the club. Is there a good reason why the GTs can't just loan the money direct to their intended target?. The club might be hindered by FL rules but the GTs aren't?

Rickler wrote:

Brents great advocates make it seem like he is doing us all a favour. Why shouldn't he chip in the money to keep PAFC going - after all it is his 'business' and nobody elses! He alone stands to make all the profit.

Isn't that the way it is with all bankers though Rickler ?, heads we win, tails you lose !

Their principles (or lack of) don't recognize the word "loss" so it needs to be offloaded onto the plebs while they sit back awaiting the return of the good times.

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

GOB wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Isn't the plan for the club (fans) to repay the GT's at the end of all this? Meaning in effect the fans will have paid twice?

And what will the GT's do with that money? That is a question that never seems to get answered?

So not only will the club have to pay back Brent for his loan, it will also have to pay back the GT's as well - Have I got this right?

How much is owed to the GT's so far then?

Firstly it has been a clearly stated aim of the GTs that the repaid monies will go back into Community projects, including but not restricted to, The Youth department, The Ladies Team and the Disability Team.

Secondly the monies loaned by the GTs has been raised by donations, including ticket sales to GT events, auctions and raffles. No0bopdy is forced to buy any of these things - if fans want to go to a Fanfest, buy a raffle ticket or an auction item that is their choice. It in no way means that all fans are paying twice. JB is payinmg the GTs back at the same rate that he is paying the other owed wages (player wages). It is against all FL rules for him to repay behind the scenes staff back at a faster rate than players.

I don't know the current balance owed to the GTs.

I do question Damon, what would happen to the GT's and therefore the communities money should the club once again be forced into administration? I am as we all are, concerned that the debts obtained under the ownership of James Bent may not be a manageable debt for the club to be burdened with in the future.

It is concerning that there seems to be some reluctance to release the debt figures, hopefully this can resolved by way of the Trust/PASB, at haste.

Surely the Green Taverners have to produce a balance sheet, that would show how much the club owe.

I am a great admirer of the GTs and have even been to fanfests. A simple chart showing money owed to the staff, the payments made to the staff and the balance outstanding would put an end to rumours of underhand dealing. Don't hold your breathe though that this will be forthcoming any time soon.

Dingle wrote:

I am a great admirer of the GTs and have even been to fanfests. A simple chart showing money owed to the staff, the payments made to the staff and the balance outstanding would put an end to rumours of underhand dealing. Don't hold your breathe though that this will be forthcoming any time soon.

if they're a charity surely they have to by law.

Davidfriio4 wrote:

Dingle wrote:

I am a great admirer of the GTs and have even been to fanfests. A simple chart showing money owed to the staff, the payments made to the staff and the balance outstanding would put an end to rumours of underhand dealing. Don't hold your breathe though that this will be forthcoming any time soon.

if they're a charity surely they have to by law.

The GT's are not a charity but a LTD company.

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Isn't the plan for the club (fans) to repay the GT's at the end of all this? Meaning in effect the fans will have paid twice?

And what will the GT's do with that money? That is a question that never seems to get answered?

Firstly it has been a clearly stated aim of the GTs that the repaid monies will go back into Community projects, including but not restricted to, The Youth department, The Ladies Team and the Disability Team.

Secondly the monies loaned by the GTs has been raised by donations, including ticket sales to GT events, auctions and raffles. No0bopdy is forced to buy any of these things - if fans want to go to a Fanfest, buy a raffle ticket or an auction item that is their choice. It in no way means that all fans are paying twice. JB is payinmg the GTs back at the same rate that he is paying the other owed wages (player wages). It is against all FL rules for him to repay behind the scenes staff back at a faster rate than players.

I don't know the current balance owed to the GTs.

I notice you said "not 'ALL' fans."

True.. Those that didn't pay the GT's directly in the first instance will escape paying twice.

However... indirectly, everyone else who contributes to PAFC in any other way will end up contributing to the Green Taverners and the things they support whether they like it or not!

Fans give money to the GT's who give money to Brent/PAFC, who gives it to the staff. That money is then gone.

If the GT's didn't want paying back, fine. But they do!

So now you have to raise money to do that... Brent doesn't do 'cash injections' with his own money. He does interest free loans. Who repays those loans?

The fans going through the turnstiles, buying merchandise etc etc.

And with all due respect... Many of the those fans probably couldn't give a damn about the GT's and many of the "community projects" they wish to support.

Worth mentioning that Abramovich also put money into the club in he form of interest free loans

Hugh Watt wrote:

Worth mentioning that Abramovich also put money into the club in he form of interest free loans

Quite... And it would seem that most football fans thinks that will eventually end in a disaster...

However... For some reason, a large segment of the Argyle fanbase seem unconcerned at the same situation within our club?

Rickler wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

Worth mentioning that Abramovich also put money into the club in he form of interest free loans

Quite... And it would seem that most football fans thinks that will eventually end in a disaster...

However... For some reason, a large segment of the Argyle fanbase seem unconcerned at the same situation within our club?

I'd rather have Abramovich............. wonder how long fletch would have lasted ?

Can you imagine the fanfests, the bucket rattling/beard growing down the Kings Road ?

Hugh Watt wrote:

Worth mentioning that Abramovich also put money into the club in he form of interest free loans

As did Matthew Harding before him.

When Harding tragically died suddenly and his family wanted the money back, Bates had to sell the club pdq to avoid Administration-and along came Abramovich.

Virtually the same thing has happened at Forest- wealthy benefactor dies-loans have to be repaid-you end up with an owner that sacks a manager after their best win of the season.

I'm not against owners "loaning" their club money, but it does have it's drawbacks, as above.

The thing with Brent is:

he'll more than likely want his money back sooner rather than later

it's just adding to the debt the football club is carrying

&

compared to the profits he'll make out of developing the real estate that he bought for a song in the PAFC "package" the loses of a well run, well supported 4th division (yeah I still talk in old money) football club are miniscule and should be written off- if only for the tax benefits.

Coxside_Green wrote:

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

GOB wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Isn't the plan for the club (fans) to repay the GT's at the end of all this? Meaning in effect the fans will have paid twice?

And what will the GT's do with that money? That is a question that never seems to get answered?

So not only will the club have to pay back Brent for his loan, it will also have to pay back the GT's as well - Have I got this right?

How much is owed to the GT's so far then?

Firstly it has been a clearly stated aim of the GTs that the repaid monies will go back into Community projects, including but not restricted to, The Youth department, The Ladies Team and the Disability Team.

Secondly the monies loaned by the GTs has been raised by donations, including ticket sales to GT events, auctions and raffles. No0bopdy is forced to buy any of these things - if fans want to go to a Fanfest, buy a raffle ticket or an auction item that is their choice. It in no way means that all fans are paying twice. JB is payinmg the GTs back at the same rate that he is paying the other owed wages (player wages). It is against all FL rules for him to repay behind the scenes staff back at a faster rate than players.

I don't know the current balance owed to the GTs.

From what I understand, all the monies raised is in the name of speeding up repayments of wages owed to the non-playing staff who worked tirelessly to help save the club. Is there a good reason why the GTs can't just loan the money direct to their intended target?. The club might be hindered by FL rules but the GTs aren't?

If GT money were given direcvtly to the staff then the GTs would become responsible for the PAYE and NI on those back weages paid. Paying the staff by way of loan to the club means that the club is responsible for the PAYE/NI.

And yes, the GTs operate through a limited company and therefore all transactions are recorded and will be published in their accounts..

What happens iof we go into admin again? Then the GTs become just another uinsecured creditor, but at least the staff have had more money back than they would have if being paid by the club.

The staff would indeed have their money paid Damon. Playing devil's advocate, who would pay the staff from the next administration, should there be one?

GOB wrote:

The staff would indeed have their money paid Damon. Playing devil's advocate, who would pay the staff from the next administration, should there be one?

And has JB made sure that his loans are structured in such a way as to ensure he isn't out of pocket next time the club calls in the Administrators?

I don't know how some of you can be so cynical about a man whose lips have been seen to quiver after an Argyle defeat.

Mind you, I bought a car once that turned out to be a clapped out rust bucket, I was the same.

You mean you were a clapped out rust bucket too?