My Take On Mr Brent & His Plans

Chemical Ali wrote:

..........
So Argyle could potentially have an increase in rent with the new retail outlets and ice rink (not sure if the cinema will be on Argyle land or JB's) and not receive any income from those units?

I don't think the cinema, hotel, etc will be on Argyle land so I don't think it will lead to an increase in the rent due to the council. That rent is attached to the area owned by the council, ie the pitch and the stands.

THIS is the document that quote was taken from. There may be an update but I don't have a copy.

I am increasingly thinking that we should be careful not to want to bring the whole development down IF we want a new stand. The task is to improve the offer. For me, one of the crucial considerations is the apparent fact that retail units will be placed within the existing grandstand footprint with no ongoing benefit to the club or, indeed, the council - one of us should be receiving rent as far as I can see.

I would rather have nothing then the sub-standard ministand that JB is proposing, if he wont compromise and deliver the stand that PAFC needs for the future,then bring the whole stinking project crashing to the ground i say, stick with the Mayflower until someone comes along and does things right, im not buying this " we would have died had it not been for JB" there were other equally if not better potential owners out there at the time that Brent taken over and there will be again if/when this whole plan goes tits up.

punchdrunk wrote:

im not buying this " we would have died had it not been for JB" there were other equally if not better potential owners out there at the time that Brent taken over and there will be again if/when this whole plan goes tits up.

Yes, they were certainly falling over themselves when you were in the 3rd division so they will all be desperate to be involved when you are in the Conference.

Face it Punchy, nobody with any sort of realistic covenant wanted PAFC when it was available for effectively nothing, the football debts were a given whoever stepped in, it was Brent or the Screwfix, me I would have kept my soul and gone for the Screwfix, one thing I could guarantee is that without Brent there would be no bitch fest about what kind of new stand you wanted because such talk would get you branded as a loony, paying for the team bus to away games would need a sponsor.

punchdrunk wrote:

I would rather have nothing then the sub-standard ministand that JB is proposing, if he wont compromise and deliver the stand that PAFC needs for the future,then bring the whole stinking project crashing to the ground i say, stick with the Mayflower until someone comes along and does things right, im not buying this " we would have died had it not been for JB" there were other equally if not better potential owners out there at the time that Brent taken over and there will be again if/when this whole plan goes tits up.

That's pretty much how I see it, the problem with that though is the debt that the club has, that seems to be ever so top secret.

It gets even funnier!

PL2F

Quote :

Reading the various threads it looks to me that most of the PASOTI posters who live in Plymouth would like the whole HHP development to go ahead while most of the posters who don't live in Plymouth don't want it to happen, aside from Graham and X Isle who seem to be vice versa.

I'd be interested to know how many members of the Working Group live in Plymouth?

I suppose one of the concerns the Planning Committee will consider is does the whole HHP development benefit the people of Plymouth?

It looks like the penny is finally dropping on Pasoti about Mr Saviour Brent's plans and why he is so reticent to build on cottage field yet doesn't mind allowing multinational giant corporations like MacDonalds and nandos having a unit in the new stand. Because he has other plans for cottage field that have feck all to do with football!

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

No wonder Nools been given the task of spreading the fantastic news about the free coaches to Burton, distraction is the best policy.

And who the feck does Postey the woman threatener think he's kidding? No fucker except the ones at Brent's ringpiece and X-Isle want the bleddy stand as it is, stop fudging Postey and do what you do best, start another anonymous account and threaten some women. Wanker

GOB wrote:

It gets even funnier!

PL2F

Quote :

Reading the various threads it looks to me that most of the PASOTI posters who live in Plymouth would like the whole HHP development to go ahead while most of the posters who don't live in Plymouth don't want it to happen, aside from Graham and X Isle who seem to be vice versa.

I'd be interested to know how many members of the Working Group live in Plymouth?

I suppose one of the concerns the Planning Committee will consider is does the whole HHP development benefit the people of Plymouth?

The planning committee that nobody knows who is on it

Says the "silent" planning committee that doesn't live in Plymouth, the one chosen by Brent

What a prick!

I dont think its the development complexes argyle fans have the real problem with its that god awful stand we will be lumbered with as a result.

the conclave of planning commite members have to look into that

What has happened to the Studio School idea in all this? Could it possibly be that Cottage Field is being excluded from the ice rink/hotel/stand plans so that the space is reserved for building the school. A very attractive prospect for the developer, as funding is provided by the Government (or this is the information given as the recent public consultation meeting).

Dingle wrote:

What has happened to the Studio School idea in all this? Could it possibly be that Cottage Field is being excluded from the ice rink/hotel/stand plans so that the space is reserved for building the school. A very attractive prospect for the developer, as funding is provided by the Government (or this is the information given as the recent public consultation meeting).

I had heard (so not necessarily reliable) that the school was to be built adjacent to the club. If true, this would certainly explain the reluctance to build anything else on there as has been intimated on that excellent thread on pasoti.

I suspect there are people playing politics & financial games behind the scenes - quel surprise! - and that plans are being drip-fed to the supporters & the electorate. With Plymouth Council being such a marginal constituency, Tudor needs to be very sure of pulling it off without shit sticking to him & his party.

knecht wrote:

Dingle wrote:

What has happened to the Studio School idea in all this? Could it possibly be that Cottage Field is being excluded from the ice rink/hotel/stand plans so that the space is reserved for building the school. A very attractive prospect for the developer, as funding is provided by the Government (or this is the information given as the recent public consultation meeting).

I had heard (so not necessarily reliable) that the school was to be built adjacent to the club. If true, this would certainly explain the reluctance to build anything else on there as has been intimated on that excellent thread on pasoti.

I suspect there are people playing politics & financial games behind the scenes - quel surprise! - and that plans are being drip-fed to the supporters & the electorate. With Plymouth Council being such a marginal constituency, Tudor needs to be very sure of pulling it off without shit sticking to him & his party.

I wonder if Nool wants to ask about this? Or Webb? Or PL2 Faced? No, not interested in this scenario where James Brent looks even more of a bandit than he does at the moment?

It would be soooooooooo good to hear Brent stutter and stumble his way through this with his cheeky little grin intact.

Webb still not commenting on it all? Mr Trade Union happy that the ordinary folk are being shafted so that a rich man just keeps getting richer? feckin turncoat wanker.

The classrooms already in the 'grand'stand plans would be ideal for housing pupils until the new building was put up.

Dingle wrote:

The classrooms already in the 'grand'stand plans would be ideal for housing pupils until the new building was put up.

more student housing i didnt think plymouth was that big to warrant as many student accomadation blocks its currently building on top of exisiting ones not including private residential ones.

I reckon that old Naps is getting more than a little concerned that the 'working group' is now taking shape as the new 'contingency group'.
All he and PL2 faced have in their locker is ,'We'd love a bigger and better grandstand but don't think the money is there'.

It is amazing how some people have become blinded by position.

Good to see people calling for the ice rink to be moved to Cottage Field allowing for a bigger stand. Perhaps Brent could move his Nandos and whatever else with it leaving all retail (and more in the bigger stand) for the club. Brent allegedly saying he doesn't want to concrete over greenspace seems like an own goal when the people of Plymouth have already said it's ok to do so (according to GC).

Ice Rink.

Fore shorely the Caribbean Drift was a sign that Plymuff isn't intended ter be that cold?

The ice rink will be rotted by the seasalt air like the old scoreboard...probably.

Tringreen wrote:

I reckon that old Naps is getting more than a little concerned that the 'working group' is now taking shape as the new 'contingency group'.
All he and PL2 faced have in their locker is ,'We'd love a bigger and better grandstand but don't think the money is there'.

It is amazing how some people have become blinded by position.

You're not wrong Tring (bloody hell I never thought I would type that 3years ago!)

You've got Newell barking at the moon and Inspector Postey who's left his season ticket to companies house behind and now believes every press release made. He must have got some briefing in the Directors Box at Port Vale. In the meantime the Trust have responded brilliantly and with maturity getting together a group of people withexpertise in the area and who have a vested interest in Central Park. They have done this not to de-rail but to be a critical friend. That is exactly why I pay my subscription.

Well done the Trust.

The question that should be asked of Brent is...

If the ice rink can be moved to Cottage field, are you willing to build a bigger and more purpose driven stand?

No way is he to build on cottage field, put the cinema and ice ring and what goes with it in the city centre.

Okay....

The question that should be asked of Brent is...

If the ice rink can be moved to -------- are you willing to build a bigger and more purpose driven stand?

Rickler wrote:

The question that should be asked of Brent is...

If the ice rink can be moved to Cottage field, are you willing to build a bigger and more purpose driven stand?

Indeed. It would be an iconic statement of intent [minus the lighthouse] and a real legacy for future generations. I can feel my lip quivering at the very thought

I read that Cottage Field is in line for development by PCC anyway.

So what if he fundamentally rejects outright the usage of Cottage field or anything other then what was proposed for the Icerink?
Do we just lie down die and accept sh*t or as ive said earlier de-rail the whole thing?

Tringreen wrote:

Rickler wrote:

The question that should be asked of Brent is...

If the ice rink can be moved to Cottage field, are you willing to build a bigger and more purpose driven stand?

Indeed. It would be an iconic statement of intent [minus the lighthouse] and a real legacy for future generations. I can feel my lip quivering at the very thought

I read that Cottage Field is in line for development by PCC anyway.

Vivien stated no green land will be built on

Speaking to The Herald later, Mr Evans denied that he had any intention of developing the park, and said he had campaigned on a manifesto that was committed to "protecting the city's green lung"