My Take On Mr Brent & His Plans

The penny really is starting to drop now. Only taken a few weeks of the plans being made available

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

When will they realize James is NOT building anything on the car park0 that will in anyway benefit the club.

The only retail outlet that will benefit the club will be the club shop that will be in the smallest unit available im sure because the world needs another fecking nandos.
It will soon dawn on the remaining brent arse kissers that he is feckin the club over with these plans probably too little too late.

Angry of Manchester wrote:

When will they realize James is NOT building anything on the car park0 that will in anyway benefit the club.

The only retail outlet that will benefit the club will be the club shop that will be in the smallest unit available im sure because the world needs another fecking nandos.
It will soon dawn on the remaining brent arse kissers that he is feckin the club over with these plans probably too little too late.

No no no. You are completely wrong see coz X-isle says twill attract better players to the club having new changing rooms so it's a fantastic development for the club. Pity the tw@t has decided to have a go about someone moaning when they're in Manchester and don't give a toss about the city of Plymouth when he lives in crawley!

Greenjock wrote:

Angry of Manchester wrote:

When will they realize James is NOT building anything on the car park0 that will in anyway benefit the club.

The only retail outlet that will benefit the club will be the club shop that will be in the smallest unit available im sure because the world needs another fecking nandos.
It will soon dawn on the remaining brent arse kissers that he is feckin the club over with these plans probably too little too late.

No no no. You are completely wrong see coz X-isle says twill attract better players to the club having new changing rooms so it's a fantastic development for the club. Pity the tw@t has decided to have a go about someone moaning when they're in Manchester and don't give a toss about the city of Plymouth when he lives in crawley!

Didn't be make a massive song and dance about the NWO Argyle badge not being traditional enough or not like the one when he started supporting the club in 2002? Now he seems complete relaxed about Brent tearing down the iconic mayflower gates. Xisle isn't really worth bothering wit though, he's just a geeky Internet eccentric that seems to think what he says us really really important. Basically as long as Argyle show no ambition and remain crap he's happy.

Greenjock wrote:

Angry of Manchester wrote:

When will they realize James is NOT building anything on the car park0 that will in anyway benefit the club.

The only retail outlet that will benefit the club will be the club shop that will be in the smallest unit available im sure because the world needs another fecking nandos.
It will soon dawn on the remaining brent arse kissers that he is feckin the club over with these plans probably too little too late.

No no no. You are completely wrong see coz X-isle says twill attract better players to the club having new changing rooms so it's a fantastic development for the club. Pity the tw@t has decided to have a go about someone moaning when they're in Manchester and don't give a toss about the city of Plymouth when he lives in crawley!

You attract players here with ambition and paying them well. Location and facilities are secondary. Xisle knows absolute jack about football in general GJ i would pay no heed to anything he says living in surrey.

Hugh Watt wrote:

Greenjock wrote:

Angry of Manchester wrote:

When will they realize James is NOT building anything on the car park0 that will in anyway benefit the club.

The only retail outlet that will benefit the club will be the club shop that will be in the smallest unit available im sure because the world needs another fecking nandos.
It will soon dawn on the remaining brent arse kissers that he is feckin the club over with these plans probably too little too late.

No no no. You are completely wrong see coz X-isle says twill attract better players to the club having new changing rooms so it's a fantastic development for the club. Pity the tw@t has decided to have a go about someone moaning when they're in Manchester and don't give a toss about the city of Plymouth when he lives in crawley!

Didn't be make a massive song and dance about the NWO Argyle badge not being traditional enough or not like the one when he started supporting the club in 2002? Now he seems complete relaxed about Brent tearing down the iconic mayflower gates. Xisle isn't really worth bothering wit though, he's just a geeky Internet eccentric that seems to think what he says us really really important. Basically as long as Argyle show no ambition and remain crap he's happy.

That's how I view Smiffy, knows very little and understands even less, just an amateur dramatic fanatic with words. Entertaining, but serious? No, not at all.

???? "Iconic gates". Last time I looked there were a set of fairly manky gates as the entrance to the ground. Suddenly these are iconic. I have been a supporter for around 50 years and to be honest couldn't give a fig if they disappear or don't. Honest lads, are they really worth getting het up about?

I don't subscribe to the "there is somebody else out there who would buy the club and do a better job" either. At best there might be but there isn't any current evidence to show there actually is. If Brent decided to wrap his hand in and not bother anymore there is as much a chance the club would die as somebody else coming in. Do I want to risk the former......not really unless somebody jumps out of the woodwork and makes a firm offer before Brent fecks off. That isn't singing Brent's praises it is just being realistic in how I personally see things.

Whoever bought Argyle would have been the same sort. There was only the posibility to jump on the Development bandwagon that made it any sort of prospect. Nobody does anything for nothing in this world. The only problem or real problem I see is possibly the size of the ground after this is done. It could be bigger capacity wise and maybe should be. But, it is what is on offer and he might as well do his worst than somebody else do it anyway. I don't give a monkeys if he uses part of the existing green bit in the park. Hardly concreting over the entire area and there is plenty of concrete in that area already for it to make little or no difference. All this outpouring of love for the blades of grass should mean that thousands of people turn up daily to walk on it when they don't now. Bet they don't though and it will be as little used in future as it is now.

My take on the objections is more that it is disappointment at the size of grandstand than anything else. He isn't building a new Wembley so it isn't good enough. If you take the entire objectors on both sites this adds up to a drop in the ocean of the support base. The silent majority as they are called mostly couldn't give a stuff either or else they would not be silent. The vast majority of Plymouth people who reside in the City couldn't give a stuff either. Anyone getting a job in anything new there will be chuffed to bits and the Politicians know very well it won't harm them at any election. Ergo it is probably going to happen no matter how wound up a few will get. None of this is a vote for Brent or a vote for his plans by the way. It's just me being realistic with myself and not trying to kid me I could change any of it even if I wanted to.

So under Brent's plans do you think his claim of making the club self sufficient is possible sensible? Taking into account the bullshit he spouted about giving the club a conference centre that would bring in vast amounts of money to rival Exeter Chiefs? When in reality it's going to be a cobbled together, push the tables together and ignore the fact it's just the hospitality suite with enough room for twenty if you sit on the stacked tables.

Or that the retail units were going to generate income for the club when in reality these units are built for nandos and MacDonalds outlets, oh and of course a saltrock shop?

And the stab in the back for the GT'S who have been accelerating Brents debt since he took over and they're rewarded by not having a venue to continue the fanfests unless they buy a building on Brent's site?

I'm not into the fanfests but the GT'S have been butt-fecked by Brent big-time, and Newell the big GT fan loves it?

The proposed development stinks and everyone knows it. Cottage Field being used could solve a lot of the gripes but Mr ethical won't use it? The reason being he has further plans for that piece of land and it won't be for something as ethical as Nandos and MacDonalds.

The clubs being raped by the man who saved it but it's ok there's a free coach to Burton if you want to sit next to a Pasoti mod.

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

???? "Iconic gates". Last time I looked there were a set of fairly manky gates as the entrance to the ground. Suddenly these are iconic. I have been a supporter for around 50 years and to be honest couldn't give a fig if they disappear or don't. Honest lads, are they really worth getting het up about?

I don't subscribe to the "there is somebody else out there who would buy the club and do a better job" either. At best there might be but there isn't any current evidence to show there actually is. If Brent decided to wrap his hand in and not bother anymore there is as much a chance the club would die as somebody else coming in. Do I want to risk the former......not really unless somebody jumps out of the woodwork and makes a firm offer before Brent fecks off. That isn't singing Brent's praises it is just being realistic in how I personally see things.

Whoever bought Argyle would have been the same sort. There was only the posibility to jump on the Development bandwagon that made it any sort of prospect. Nobody does anything for nothing in this world. The only problem or real problem I see is possibly the size of the ground after this is done. It could be bigger capacity wise and maybe should be. But, it is what is on offer and he might as well do his worst than somebody else do it anyway. I don't give a monkeys if he uses part of the existing green bit in the park. Hardly concreting over the entire area and there is plenty of concrete in that area already for it to make little or no difference. All this outpouring of love for the blades of grass should mean that thousands of people turn up daily to walk on it when they don't now. Bet they don't though and it will be as little used in future as it is now.

My take on the objections is more that it is disappointment at the size of grandstand than anything else. He isn't building a new Wembley so it isn't good enough. If you take the entire objectors on both sites this adds up to a drop in the ocean of the support base. The silent majority as they are called mostly couldn't give a stuff either or else they would not be silent. The vast majority of Plymouth people who reside in the City couldn't give a stuff either. Anyone getting a job in anything new there will be chuffed to bits and the Politicians know very well it won't harm them at any election. Ergo it is probably going to happen no matter how wound up a few will get. None of this is a vote for Brent or a vote for his plans by the way. It's just me being realistic with myself and not trying to kid me I could change any of it even if I wanted to.

How can anyone type so much and say absolutely nothing of interest?

Greenjock wrote:

So under Brent's plans do you think his claim of making the club self sufficient is possible sensible? Taking into account the bullshit he spouted about giving the club a conference centre that would bring in vast amounts of money to rival Exeter Chiefs? When in reality it's going to be a cobbled together, push the tables together and ignore the fact it's just the hospitality suite with enough room for twenty if you sit on the stacked tables.

Or that the retail units were going to generate income for the club when in reality these units are built for nandos and MacDonalds outlets, oh and of course a saltrock shop?

And the stab in the back for the GT'S who have been accelerating Brents debt since he took over and they're rewarded by not having a venue to continue the fanfests unless they buy a building on Brent's site?

I'm not into the fanfests but the GT'S have been butt-fecked by Brent big-time, and Newell the big GT fan loves it?

The proposed development stinks and everyone knows it. Cottage Field being used could solve a lot of the gripes but Mr ethical won't use it? The reason being he has further plans for that piece of land and it won't be for something as ethical as Nandos and MacDonalds.

The clubs being raped by the man who saved it but it's ok there's a free coach to Burton if you want to sit next to a Pasoti mod.

If it comes down to it cottage field must be sacrificed. I'm not going to accept a small inadequate stand that can never be built apon or extended in future just so nandos can put a restaurant there!

At the end of the day the ice rink could go on cottage field or at least half of it! meaning a far more adequate stand can be built and none of Brent's complexes will be lost meaning win/win for all. Sure it will be sad to see the field go but at the end of the day there are many other football and rugby pitches in the park so its not like youth games will cease to be and who knows depending on how its built one of the pitches could still remain for use! im sure if Brent offers to build a club hut on one of the pitches as a token to the djm and plant a few more trees and plants in the park it will smooth over critics concerning the green belt.

I hope the trust add this suggestion to their dossier as an alternative

The GT's have been screwed by the sounds of it, I would have thought a Sports bar would be ideal to have at the complex. Hold the fanfests in there and it can still serve as pub/bar for the rest of the time.

No Jock I don't agree with all of it but my point being that whoever we had would more likely have been more interested in the outside concerns that the within. Most stuff spouted is bullshit by most businessmen because their sole interest is their business concerns rather that the periferal. I doubt we were ever going to have a great income from any of it and personally never thought we would. Going to the Theatre Royal and asking one question, which was what are the numbers adding up to and not getting any answer at all made that obvious.

Whether people like it or not, everyone has a view and just because it doesn't necessarily conform to the majority that post does not make it invalid. Give them a name and that's ok so we can all have a little giggle. It doesn't matter what they say as long as it conforms. That's what people previously have done to X-Isle. They don't agree so he has to be an idiot or licking ass or whatever slant somebody with a different view wants to brand it. It can't be that he has come to a view all by himself and is entitled to have it. Just like you Rickler. If you find I have nothing to say then don't read my posts. Simples really. You don't have to show your ignorance continually or perhaps you do. Little man with big ego syndrome. But hey, whatever floats your boat and you get off on.

think we are now approaching the 'business end' of brents plans for plymouth.

the city centre is dying so build an out of centre (but within the city) retail experience, he'll fund the stands BUT and its a big BUT it will make money for his firm & PCC but sod all for PAFC which willl be heralded by the sound of the buckets rattling endlessly.

The GT;s need to find a new home? well that says to me the club are planning to take the 'fest' in house maybe make it an official club pre-entertainment package (away as well as home fans) for those who cant afford to pay £75 a game for the exec 'experience'.
footballing first???

the credit crunch etc has been ongoing since 08 alongside it argyle have gone backwards and like to credit crunch/downturn/recessession is likely to continue for many years as things stand.

Greenjock wrote:

... X-isle says twill attract better players to the club having new changing rooms so it's a fantastic development for the club. Pity the tw@t has decided to have a go about someone moaning when they're in Manchester and don't give a toss about the city of Plymouth when he lives in crawley!...

Like I said before, I can't work the guy out at all. I used to quite respect him - the passionate sloganeering ("honesty, integrity" yada yada yada) was quite seductive at first. However his advocacy of Brent is quite bizarre and impossible to square with his stated beliefs. By his own admission he has never even met Brent and appears to know next to nothing about his past, or his career in general, so why he is so convinced that Brent is a "good man" is a complete mystery.

He was (quite rightly) against Ridsdale on principle, yet ignores the fact that Brent was clearly onside with the Riddler from day one. Quite apart from the fact that Brent was quite happy to employ the light-fingered one at PAFC even after he became the owner, he ignores the evidence that Brent was reported as being involved in a bid with the Riddler at the start - not to mention the circumstantial evidence that they must have at the very least known of each other long before the development land at PAFC hove into view.

His most bizarre position though, is the nonsense he's now talking about Che Guevara, capitalism and Brent, on the long thread about the Stand proposals. He seems to be trying to cast Brent as an example of a good capitalist, completely ignoring his past as a very senior official in one of the most venal and rapacious organisations that has ever existed on God's green earth. The other day he was mocking Brent's critics with hyperbolic accusations that they were trying to paint him as a Gordon Gekko figure, as if this would be a way of confirming how unreasonable they were. Notwithstanding the fact that Gordon Gekko was a stockbroker and not a banker per se, if he had applied for a job at Citigroup, they would probably have turned him down for not being ruthless enough.

Somebody said to me today that they were thinking of posting a rumour on PASOTI that would plausible but outrageous, in the sense of being something that all fans should be up in arms about, just to see if the Brentites and X-Isle in particular, would find some way of spinning it as beneficial.

It seems that you like to compare yourselves to clubs such as Portsmouth, to the extent that some of you claim they are your real rivals.

Porstmouth had an even worse situation than yours, yet their fans haven't thrown their hands in the air and welcomed in any of the rich men who were circling, on the basis that "no-one else can help us" - their Trust formed a consortium alongside rich fans a la Swansea and are fighting one of those rich men for control of the club. (Two rich men, if you come to the obvious conclusion that Harris is a stalking horse for Portpin).

They don't have a council who is willing to bend over backwards to help them to the degree that you would almost certainly have done and as far as I know they don't have an attractive asset like your development land. Yet somehow, they have formulated a bid that is costing them far more than you would have had to pay to take over the club - the offer to Chanrai/Portpin for Fratton Park and which is the subject of the legal dispute, is alone worth half the entire secured and FC debt that you were left with after Brent took the club out of administration. I had the figures somewhere and lost them, but IIRC the total sum they have pledged is more than your Secured Debt + football debt + CVA etc. What have their fans got that yours haven't got?

If a properly constituted Trust (as opposed to the publicity-stunt factory of the Webb Show) was in control of the club now, then far from the club being dominated by the Politburo, they could be far more easily marginalised than is currently the case when they are under the wing of their rich and powerful patron. What you are seeing now is not what would happen under democratic fan representation, as some of you so misguidedly conclude. Rather it is a result of patronage dispensed by a powerful individual, bolstered by the power of the personality cult - the direct opposite of democratic rule in fact. It's no coincidence that these traits, as well as the constant propaganda and suppression of dissent, are often hallmarks of a feudal monarchy or a modern dictatorship.

Sadly, I expect you will persist with this futile yearning for a messiah to take you to the promised land until a few more McCauleys, Stapletons, NWOs and James Brents have shot through (that is if there's anything left) until the penny drops that men on "White Chargers" invariably look like Brent close-up and that the only people you can ultimately trust to make sure your own best interests are paramount, are yourselves.

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

...Whether people like it or not, everyone has a view and just because it doesn't necessarily conform to the majority that post does not make it invalid...

The fact that everyone has a view doesn't make everyone's view equally sensible.

Quote :

It doesn't matter what they say as long as it conforms. That's what people previously have done to X-Isle. They don't agree so he has to be an idiot or licking ass or whatever slant somebody with a different view wants to brand it...

But his point of view regarding Brent is often idiotic, in the sense that it doesn't fit the facts. I'm afraid his refusal to hear a bad word said about him regardless, to the extent that he resorts to ridiculous strawman arguments that paint Brent's critics as idiots, "or whatever slant somebody with a different view wants to brand it", do make him appear an ass-licker.

Quote :

It can't be that he has come to a view all by himself and is entitled to have it.

How he arrived at his opinion is not important. What he believes is the issue. Of course he's entitled to believe anything he likes, but then anyone who disagrees with him is also entitled to criticise those beliefs. It's hardly as if he's reticent about attacking those he disagrees with.

X aisle is a whack job.

And once again, through personal experience... I can tell you, is a nasty, snide, arrogant, bigot.

He used this website for a short period the last time he was laughed off of Pasoti, but abandoned it when it was obvious his views were archaic.

He was wrong about Stapleton, he is wrong about Brent. He is wrong about almost everything.

He writes good prose though.. It covers up for a lot.

And in his case... Once a Pasoti mod, always a Pasoti mod!

A'nool fool.

Rickler wrote:

Once a Pasoti mod, always a Pasoti mod!

A'nool fool.

Nool + Poodle = Noodle. Pasoti Mods are Noodles, there ya go.

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

???? "Iconic gates". Last time I looked there were a set of fairly manky gates as the entrance to the ground. Suddenly these are iconic. I have been a supporter for around 50 years and to be honest couldn't give a fig if they disappear or don't. Honest lads, are they really worth getting het up about?

I don't subscribe to the "there is somebody else out there who would buy the club and do a better job" either. At best there might be but there isn't any current evidence to show there actually is. If Brent decided to wrap his hand in and not bother anymore there is as much a chance the club would die as somebody else coming in. Do I want to risk the former......not really unless somebody jumps out of the woodwork and makes a firm offer before Brent fecks off. That isn't singing Brent's praises it is just being realistic in how I personally see things.

Whoever bought Argyle would have been the same sort. There was only the posibility to jump on the Development bandwagon that made it any sort of prospect. Nobody does anything for nothing in this world. The only problem or real problem I see is possibly the size of the ground after this is done. It could be bigger capacity wise and maybe should be. But, it is what is on offer and he might as well do his worst than somebody else do it anyway. I don't give a monkeys if he uses part of the existing green bit in the park. Hardly concreting over the entire area and there is plenty of concrete in that area already for it to make little or no difference. All this outpouring of love for the blades of grass should mean that thousands of people turn up daily to walk on it when they don't now. Bet they don't though and it will be as little used in future as it is now.

My take on the objections is more that it is disappointment at the size of grandstand than anything else. He isn't building a new Wembley so it isn't good enough. If you take the entire objectors on both sites this adds up to a drop in the ocean of the support base. The silent majority as they are called mostly couldn't give a stuff either or else they would not be silent. The vast majority of Plymouth people who reside in the City couldn't give a stuff either. Anyone getting a job in anything new there will be chuffed to bits and the Politicians know very well it won't harm them at any election. Ergo it is probably going to happen no matter how wound up a few will get. None of this is a vote for Brent or a vote for his plans by the way. It's just me being realistic with myself and not trying to kid me I could change any of it even if I wanted to.

Nobodys wanting a new Wembley sensible, just an extra 2,000 seats and the retail outlets benefitttig the club

Little old Wycombe Wanderers have a better stand than the one proposed.

It is now a decade or two old and was built at a different time but the facilities within, apart from changing rooms/ gym etc are very large banqueting/function rooms, well used by the community for charity events, dinners/weddings/parties etc etc.
These proposed 'retail units' at Home Park offer nothing to the club at all. In fact, the club will be hemmed in and the little stand, a token gesture to get the plans through.
It will no longer be Home Park.

As I say Xisle is little more than a geeky Internet eccentric that gets off on the sight of his opinions and is best ignored. You can present arguments like Brent's involvement with Citigroup and enthusiasm to employee the Riddler but they get ignored. Basically albert has come in and effectively promised to keep Argyle village and crap and that's exactly what he wants.

I don't but the there was no one else argument. Someone always wants to buy a football club, look at Truro.

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

???? "Iconic gates". Last time I looked there were a set of fairly manky gates as the entrance to the ground. Suddenly these are iconic. I have been a supporter for around 50 years and to be honest couldn't give a fig if they disappear or don't. Honest lads, are they really worth getting het up about?

I don't subscribe to the "there is somebody else out there who would buy the club and do a better job" either. At best there might be but there isn't any current evidence to show there actually is. If Brent decided to wrap his hand in and not bother anymore there is as much a chance the club would die as somebody else coming in. Do I want to risk the former......not really unless somebody jumps out of the woodwork and makes a firm offer before Brent fecks off. That isn't singing Brent's praises it is just being realistic in how I personally see things.

Whoever bought Argyle would have been the same sort. There was only the posibility to jump on the Development bandwagon that made it any sort of prospect. Nobody does anything for nothing in this world. The only problem or real problem I see is possibly the size of the ground after this is done. It could be bigger capacity wise and maybe should be. But, it is what is on offer and he might as well do his worst than somebody else do it anyway. I don't give a monkeys if he uses part of the existing green bit in the park. Hardly concreting over the entire area and there is plenty of concrete in that area already for it to make little or no difference. All this outpouring of love for the blades of grass should mean that thousands of people turn up daily to walk on it when they don't now. Bet they don't though and it will be as little used in future as it is now.

My take on the objections is more that it is disappointment at the size of grandstand than anything else. He isn't building a new Wembley so it isn't good enough. If you take the entire objectors on both sites this adds up to a drop in the ocean of the support base. The silent majority as they are called mostly couldn't give a stuff either or else they would not be silent. The vast majority of Plymouth people who reside in the City couldn't give a stuff either. Anyone getting a job in anything new there will be chuffed to bits and the Politicians know very well it won't harm them at any election. Ergo it is probably going to happen no matter how wound up a few will get. None of this is a vote for Brent or a vote for his plans by the way. It's just me being realistic with myself and not trying to kid me I could change any of it even if I wanted to.

If you think that the input on PASOTI and ATD is an all encompassing way to measure discontent about the redevelopment proposals,then you are seriously deluded. In my travels i get to talk to many Argyle fans,not amounting to thousands admittedly,but certainly enough to provide a decent cross section of support.These supporters can in no way be said to have extreme views on all matters Argyle but to a man [and woman] they are alarmed at the long term implications for our club-the general feeling is that the developments represent Argyle minimum,profit maximum and they are far from "not giving a stuff".What action to take? Difficult one,it does appear that we've been presented with a fait accompli.The Argyle Trust have offered some positive opposition [oxymoron?] to this ill balanced hybrid and maybe they represent the best way forward,which represents quite a sea change in my own POV,having been indifferent and sceptical to the trust previously.

Greenskin wrote:

If you think that the input on PASOTI and ATD is an all encompassing way to measure discontent about the redevelopment proposals,then you are seriously deluded. In my travels i get to talk to many Argyle fans,not amounting to thousands admittedly,but certainly enough to provide a decent cross section of support.These supporters can in no way be said to have extreme views on all matters Argyle but to a man [and woman] they are alarmed at the long term implications for our club-the general feeling is that the developments represent Argyle minimum,profit maximum and they are far from "not giving a stuff".What action to take? Difficult one,it does appear that we've been presented with a fait accompli.The Argyle Trust have offered some positive opposition [oxymoron?] to this ill balanced hybrid and maybe they represent the best way forward,which represents quite a sea change in my own POV,having been indifferent and sceptical to the trust previously.

That's pretty much my experience, too, Greenskin. Not to mention the reactions of ordinary Plymothians to the concept of a cinema and shops in the park, which is mostly horror. And there, I reckon, lies the way forward - lose the cinema and shops (if they must be built, there's lots of other places, like the 'West End' of the city centre, which has been waiting for redevelopment ever since the last plans for Colin Campbell Court fell apart and which the demolition of part of the Pavilions will free up) and build a proper grandstand with facilities that provide an income for the club.

Peggy * wrote:

Greenskin wrote:

If you think that the input on PASOTI and ATD is an all encompassing way to measure discontent about the redevelopment proposals,then you are seriously deluded. In my travels i get to talk to many Argyle fans,not amounting to thousands admittedly,but certainly enough to provide a decent cross section of support.These supporters can in no way be said to have extreme views on all matters Argyle but to a man [and woman] they are alarmed at the long term implications for our club-the general feeling is that the developments represent Argyle minimum,profit maximum and they are far from "not giving a stuff".What action to take? Difficult one,it does appear that we've been presented with a fait accompli.The Argyle Trust have offered some positive opposition [oxymoron?] to this ill balanced hybrid and maybe they represent the best way forward,which represents quite a sea change in my own POV,having been indifferent and sceptical to the trust previously.

That's pretty much my experience, too, Greenskin. Not to mention the reactions of ordinary Plymothians to the concept of a cinema and shops in the park, which is mostly horror. And there, I reckon, lies the way forward - lose the cinema and shops (if they must be built, there's lots of other places, like the 'West End' of the city centre, which has been waiting for redevelopment ever since the last plans for Colin Campbell Court fell apart and which the demolition of part of the Pavilions will free up) and build a proper grandstand with facilities that provide an income for the club.

Good posts and similar to the views of most plymouthians, i have spoken to, have about these plans.

Greenjock wrote:

The penny really is starting to drop now. Only taken a few weeks of the plans being made available

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

Ah ha! it looks like the sheep are indeed starting to wake up down at the farm.

XIsle was knocking out a campaign about Riddler, he even had a tag line at the bottom of his page saying "no snake oil salesmen in our club," yet when Brent's unpaid administrator (was it £25k a week I have heard mentioned, that probably went on the staff debt, or did he fund it by player sales?) passed the baton to him after doing all his dirty work Brent is a saint? There are none so blind as those that won't see.