Akkeron response to WG

and services to the disabled/vulnerable suffer to pay for it !
or rather to line Brents pockets with.

Peggy * wrote:

ZYPH wrote:

Too early to agree with you that he is asset stripping the club.....retail units would be standard for such a development....always gives and take when such a development takes place.....especially when your future new stand costs the club nothing....and so soon after administration amazing.

This keeps getting trotted out as if we should be doffing our caps to the fine gentleman for his largesse.

It's only 'free' because that's part of the deal that allows the rest of HHP to be developed, for crying out loud.

As I said Peggy.....£10m of free stand....you see it one way I see it another.....life is full of compromises...at my age that becomes evident.

The fact remains that a little while ago Argyle had enough land to build the biggest grandstand in the country. We are now going to get a mini stand hemmed in by an underground car park, some shops, an ice rink and a cinema. I'd hardly call that costing us nothing.

That is giving us some shiny new seats to sit in but occupants of the grandstand choose to sit there for the view. These fans aren't going to want to sit in the bottom say 12-15 rows. I can see there being a mad scramble for the seats that could be considered to be high enough to replicate what these fans are currently used to.

I'm sure inside will be very nice but will there be enough room for all the fans who currently go to the Far Post club and used to before half of it was closed? For all the fans in the Fansfest? Will these fans be priced out as corporate, corporate, corporate takes over?

Fans who currently use the grandstand will find improvements in some ways and may not in others. Fans who can afford the facilities in the new stand will I'm sure be fine. Others may feel pushed out and not be very happy about it.

As for the projected revenue from our all singing and dancing South Stand. I remember the amazement when the board told the PASB it had based it's budget on crowds of 8000. I will treat JB's wide ranging figures of 1-2 million with the same scepticism until I actually see the figures to back up those optimistic claims.

since when has an owner of a football club wanting to build a new stand been seen as giving it to the club for free?

nothing about the stand is free its a stand James had to build before he would be allowed to commence with his lavish chav items on the carpark. The stand also is the bare minimum and cheapest option he could get away with. If brenties cant see that James plans to bolt within a year or two only have to look at this stand and its ambitions as proof.

Richard.....when standing was allowed in front of the Mayflower was it empty or well used.....genuine question from an exile.

Wouldn't the new seats be on a gradual slope anyway,possibly on a steeper incline than the obsolete area ?

ZYPH wrote:

Richard.....when standing was allowed in front of the Mayflower was it empty or well used.....genuine question from an exile.

Wouldn't the new seats be on a gradual slope anyway,possibly on a steeper incline than the obsolete area ?

i had my season ticket in the terrace for a few seasons and i can confirm it was well used.

Thanks Angry.

ZYPH wrote:

Richard.....when standing was allowed in front of the Mayflower was it empty or well used.....genuine question from an exile.

Wouldn't the new seats be on a gradual slope anyway,possibly on a steeper incline than the obsolete area ?

The standing area isn't the grandstand is it. That's the Mayflower terrace. Those lower seats in the new stand may well be used by fans moving over from other parts of the ground who want to use the facilities in the new stand. My point is the fans sat in the current grandstand will not want to move to lower seats if they can help it. The view will not be as good. Even the front row seats in the current stand are high. The new stand doesn't look much higher, if at all, than the Lyndhurst. The obvious place for current grandstand fans to aim for is the 5 row shelf but not everybody currently in the grandstand is going to fit into those 5 rows. Apart from that, I can't quite work out whether I would want to be sat in a crowd of only 5 rows. At the moment I'm in the fourth row back and when I think of the fans in front of me and the one row behind, that isn't many people at all. There could be a feeling of being cut off from the rest of the world.

Another point is ( unless it's been changed) there is no way to transfer from the new stand to the other parts of the ground, so the facilities in the new stand will not be available to other fans anyway.

ZYPH wrote:

Iggy wrote:

Tringreen wrote:

Bore off Zyph........

Zyph:
Iggy........Have you personally met and talked to James Brent....I have..... and your comment about asset stripping is so out of order that it is beyond belief...that is not Brent's style at all.

Calm as a cucumber mate, now I know I said that I was going to keep out of this but let's have one last go here,
You made the statement about Brent highlighted above?
Now that Brent has asset stripped the club, down to having a school in the corner, retail units underneath and pinched half the room at the back of the stand for the ice rink/access roads, do you think that maybe you judged Brent rightly or wrongly?

Too early to agree with you that he is asset stripping the club.....retail units would be standard for such a development....always gives and take when such a development takes place.....especially when your future new stand costs the club nothing....and so soon after administration amazing.

Name me one other club in the country that has been built a stand by their owner who then sells the freehold of said units or the future income of said units? The whole point of Plymouth Argyle is that it is a FOOTBALL CLUB! When has it become ok for a nice bloke like Brent to roll up, build all over the terraces, underneath the stands all in the name of profit for him and his feckin wife? I have been supporting Argyle for about twenty times as long as Brent, can I have a slice of the pie?
Give me feckin strength, we are a football club! We are a football club, we are a football club, we are a football club, we are a football club, we are a football club!
Sorry to go on but a lot of people seem to confuse us with a feckin Tory hedge fund/members club, well feck the lot of you wankers, you will get the club you deserve, trouble is you'll land me with it as well you c unts.

Richard Blight wrote:

ZYPH wrote:

Richard.....when standing was allowed in front of the Mayflower was it empty or well used.....genuine question from an exile.

Wouldn't the new seats be on a gradual slope anyway,possibly on a steeper incline than the obsolete area ?

The standing area isn't the grandstand is it. That's the Mayflower terrace. Those lower seats in the new stand may well be used by fans moving over from other parts of the ground who want to use the facilities in the new stand. My point is the fans sat in the current grandstand will not want to move to lower seats if they can help it. The view will not be as good. Even the front row seats in the current stand are high. The new stand doesn't look much higher, if at all, than the Lyndhurst. The obvious place for current grandstand fans to aim for is the 5 row shelf but not everybody currently in the grandstand is going to fit into those 5 rows. Apart from that, I can't quite work out whether I would want to be sat in a crowd of only 5 rows. At the moment I'm in the fourth row back and when I think of the fans in front of me and the one row behind, that isn't many people at all. There could be a feeling of being cut off from the rest of the world.

Another point is ( unless it's been changed) there is no way to transfer from the new stand to the other parts of the ground, so the facilities in the new stand will not be available to other fans anyway.

I wouldn't mind if we had the stand but then left an area the size of the mayflower to seat at a later date, but we are losing that space to Brent, not only are we ending up with less seats the Footprint of HP will be considerably smaller.

What company is it that is advising Brent on this because the more I read the less chance I see of Brent's white elephant employing a laborer, never mind a bulldozer.

Iggy wrote:

ZYPH wrote:

Iggy wrote:

Tringreen wrote:

Bore off Zyph........

Zyph:
Iggy........Have you personally met and talked to James Brent....I have..... and your comment about asset stripping is so out of order that it is beyond belief...that is not Brent's style at all.

Calm as a cucumber mate, now I know I said that I was going to keep out of this but let's have one last go here,
You made the statement about Brent highlighted above?
Now that Brent has asset stripped the club, down to having a school in the corner, retail units underneath and pinched half the room at the back of the stand for the ice rink/access roads, do you think that maybe you judged Brent rightly or wrongly?

Too early to agree with you that he is asset stripping the club.....retail units would be standard for such a development....always gives and take when such a development takes place.....especially when your future new stand costs the club nothing....and so soon after administration amazing.

Name me one other club in the country that has been built a stand by their owner who then sells the freehold of said units or the future income of said units? The whole point of Plymouth Argyle is that it is a FOOTBALL CLUB! When has it become ok for a nice bloke like Brent to roll up, build all over the terraces, underneath the stands all in the name of profit for him and his feckin wife? I have been supporting Argyle for about twenty times as long as Brent, can I have a slice of the pie?
Give me feckin strength, we are a football club! We are a football club, we are a football club, we are a football club, we are a football club, we are a football club!
Sorry to go on but a lot of people seem to confuse us with a feckin Tory hedge fund/members club, well feck the lot of you wankers, you will get the club you deserve, trouble is you'll land me with it as well you c unts.

I dont mind you going on Iggy.........but repeating yourself for a whole line must be a sign of stress.....I'm going out with the grandchildren now so talk among yourselves for a few hours.

ZYPH wrote:

Peggy * wrote:

ZYPH wrote:

Too early to agree with you that he is asset stripping the club.....retail units would be standard for such a development....always gives and take when such a development takes place.....especially when your future new stand costs the club nothing....and so soon after administration amazing.

This keeps getting trotted out as if we should be doffing our caps to the fine gentleman for his largesse.

It's only 'free' because that's part of the deal that allows the rest of HHP to be developed, for crying out loud.

As I said Peggy.....£10m of free stand....you see it one way I see it another.....life is full of compromises...at my age that becomes evident.

This figure seems to have become accepted as gospel; yet the Working Group has yet to see any publicly available figures which give details of how the £10 million figure has been arrived at. Does it, for example, include a proportion of the cost of building the underground car park?

In researching the costs of comparable Grandstands, one that stood out was Hibernian's new 6,400 capacity Grandstand, built a couple of years ago at a cost of £4 million. See here:

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

It's also worth having a look at the completed stand:

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

Argyle Fans' Trust wrote:

ZYPH wrote:

Peggy * wrote:

ZYPH wrote:

Too early to agree with you that he is asset stripping the club.....retail units would be standard for such a development....always gives and take when such a development takes place.....especially when your future new stand costs the club nothing....and so soon after administration amazing.

This keeps getting trotted out as if we should be doffing our caps to the fine gentleman for his largesse.

It's only 'free' because that's part of the deal that allows the rest of HHP to be developed, for crying out loud.

As I said Peggy.....£10m of free stand....you see it one way I see it another.....life is full of compromises...at my age that becomes evident.

This figure seems to have become accepted as gospel; yet the Working Group has yet to see any publicly available figures which give details of how the £10 million figure has been arrived at. Does it, for example, include a proportion of the cost of building the underground car park?

In researching the costs of comparable Grandstands, one that stood out was Hibernian's new 6,400 capacity Grandstand, built a couple of years ago at a cost of £4 million. See here:

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

It's also worth having a look at the completed stand:

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

There you have it, that's what we should have and that's what we could have, Brent!

ZYPH wrote:

Iggy wrote:

ZYPH wrote:

Iggy wrote:

Tringreen wrote:

Bore off Zyph........

Zyph:
Iggy........Have you personally met and talked to James Brent....I have..... and your comment about asset stripping is so out of order that it is beyond belief...that is not Brent's style at all.

Calm as a cucumber mate, now I know I said that I was going to keep out of this but let's have one last go here,
You made the statement about Brent highlighted above?
Now that Brent has asset stripped the club, down to having a school in the corner, retail units underneath and pinched half the room at the back of the stand for the ice rink/access roads, do you think that maybe you judged Brent rightly or wrongly?

Too early to agree with you that he is asset stripping the club.....retail units would be standard for such a development....always gives and take when such a development takes place.....especially when your future new stand costs the club nothing....and so soon after administration amazing.

Name me one other club in the country that has been built a stand by their owner who then sells the freehold of said units or the future income of said units? The whole point of Plymouth Argyle is that it is a FOOTBALL CLUB! When has it become ok for a nice bloke like Brent to roll up, build all over the terraces, underneath the stands all in the name of profit for him and his feckin wife? I have been supporting Argyle for about twenty times as long as Brent, can I have a slice of the pie?
Give me feckin strength, we are a football club! We are a football club, we are a football club, we are a football club, we are a football club, we are a football club!
Sorry to go on but a lot of people seem to confuse us with a feckin Tory hedge fund/members club, well feck the lot of you wankers, you will get the club you deserve, trouble is you'll land me with it as well you c unts.

I dont mind you going on Iggy.........but repeating yourself for a whole line must be a sign of stress.....I'm going out with the grandchildren now so talk among yourselves for a few hours.

And he walks away from an argument he has no answers to.......

GOB wrote:

Argyle Fans' Trust wrote:

ZYPH wrote:

Peggy * wrote:

ZYPH wrote:

Too early to agree with you that he is asset stripping the club.....retail units would be standard for such a development....always gives and take when such a development takes place.....especially when your future new stand costs the club nothing....and so soon after administration amazing.

This keeps getting trotted out as if we should be doffing our caps to the fine gentleman for his largesse.

It's only 'free' because that's part of the deal that allows the rest of HHP to be developed, for crying out loud.

As I said Peggy.....£10m of free stand....you see it one way I see it another.....life is full of compromises...at my age that becomes evident.

This figure seems to have become accepted as gospel; yet the Working Group has yet to see any publicly available figures which give details of how the £10 million figure has been arrived at. Does it, for example, include a proportion of the cost of building the underground car park?

In researching the costs of comparable Grandstands, one that stood out was Hibernian's new 6,400 capacity Grandstand, built a couple of years ago at a cost of £4 million. See here:

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

It's also worth having a look at the completed stand:

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

There you have it, that's what we should have and that's what we could have, Brent!

This is worthy of its own thread!

Argyle Fans' Trust wrote:

ZYPH wrote:

Peggy * wrote:

ZYPH wrote:

Too early to agree with you that he is asset stripping the club.....retail units would be standard for such a development....always gives and take when such a development takes place.....especially when your future new stand costs the club nothing....and so soon after administration amazing.

This keeps getting trotted out as if we should be doffing our caps to the fine gentleman for his largesse.

It's only 'free' because that's part of the deal that allows the rest of HHP to be developed, for crying out loud.

As I said Peggy.....£10m of free stand....you see it one way I see it another.....life is full of compromises...at my age that becomes evident.

This figure seems to have become accepted as gospel; yet the Working Group has yet to see any publicly available figures which give details of how the £10 million figure has been arrived at. Does it, for example, include a proportion of the cost of building the underground car park?

In researching the costs of comparable Grandstands, one that stood out was Hibernian's new 6,400 capacity Grandstand, built a couple of years ago at a cost of £4 million. See here:

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

It's also worth having a look at the completed stand:

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

Exactly. Keep up the good work AFT !

The football club is being shafted by the asset stripper, with the assistance of PCC.

Brent has absolutely nothing in common with the Avivafest types and their silly hat wearing leaders. He is playing a blinder by making them feel important and getting them onside. Now we have a sponsor intimating future investment in the ground. So the handing over of the football club asap by the asset stripper looms closer.
The whole thing stinks to high heaven.
Lies and more damn lies.

Iggy is 100% correct to be totally pissed off with the whole thing. The only sure thing is that the football club will not inspire new followers for a very, very long time if this goes ahead.
It will remain as a 6k Avivafest.
No class. No ambition. No future.
A sort of private Janner celebration of parochiality.

Those Argyle people with some vision and sophistication, will never forgive those who sold out the club's future for their place at the top table.

Iggy wrote:

ZYPH wrote:

Iggy wrote:

ZYPH wrote:

Iggy wrote:

Tringreen wrote:

Bore off Zyph........

Zyph:
Iggy........Have you personally met and talked to James Brent....I have..... and your comment about asset stripping is so out of order that it is beyond belief...that is not Brent's style at all.

Calm as a cucumber mate, now I know I said that I was going to keep out of this but let's have one last go here,
You made the statement about Brent highlighted above?
Now that Brent has asset stripped the club, down to having a school in the corner, retail units underneath and pinched half the room at the back of the stand for the ice rink/access roads, do you think that maybe you judged Brent rightly or wrongly?

Too early to agree with you that he is asset stripping the club.....retail units would be standard for such a development....always gives and take when such a development takes place.....especially when your future new stand costs the club nothing....and so soon after administration amazing.

Name me one other club in the country that has been built a stand by their owner who then sells the freehold of said units or the future income of said units? The whole point of Plymouth Argyle is that it is a FOOTBALL CLUB! When has it become ok for a nice bloke like Brent to roll up, build all over the terraces, underneath the stands all in the name of profit for him and his feckin wife? I have been supporting Argyle for about twenty times as long as Brent, can I have a slice of the pie?
Give me feckin strength, we are a football club! We are a football club, we are a football club, we are a football club, we are a football club, we are a football club!
Sorry to go on but a lot of people seem to confuse us with a feckin Tory hedge fund/members club, well feck the lot of you wankers, you will get the club you deserve, trouble is you'll land me with it as well you c unts.

I dont mind you going on Iggy.........but repeating yourself for a whole line must be a sign of stress.....I'm going out with the grandchildren now so talk among yourselves for a few hours.

And he walks away from an argument he has no answers to.......

The grandchildrens' loss is our gain

Probably teaching them the janner song , right now

James Brent like to talk buisness and figures so let me state something here and i hope the trust take what i put and put into a more compelling argument to use.

Af ootball stadium has endless capabilities with its usage

an ice rink is can only be used for ice skating and wont be used all the time.

whats going to the biggest waste of money at home park in the future? a sub standard stand that cant be adpated or an half empty ice rink arena?

Argyle Fans' Trust wrote:

In researching the costs of comparable Grandstands, one that stood out was Hibernian's new 6,400 capacity Grandstand, built a couple of years ago at a cost of £4 million. See here:

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

It's also worth having a look at the completed stand:

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

So the drivel is all pervasive.

That isn't the "new stand", the date, 2003, should have been a clue, it also didn't cost £4million to replace the old East Terrace with the single tier stand which now stands there and the redevelopment has helped to sink the Hibees further into debt which threatens the very existence of the club.

One thing you have in common of course is that more than half the green seats at Easter Road are empty on yer average match day. They could have knocked down the East terrace, left the space empty, and still had enough seats for all but two games a season.

Lord Tisdale wrote:

Argyle Fans' Trust wrote:

In researching the costs of comparable Grandstands, one that stood out was Hibernian's new 6,400 capacity Grandstand, built a couple of years ago at a cost of £4 million. See here:

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

It's also worth having a look at the completed stand:

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

So the drivel is all pervasive.

That isn't the "new stand", the date, 2003, should have been a clue, it also didn't cost £4million to replace the old East Terrace with the single tier stand which now stands there and the redevelopment has helped to sink the Hibees further into debt which threatens the very existence of the club.

One thing you have in common of course is that more than half the green seats at Easter Road are empty on yer average match day. They could have knocked down the East terrace, left the space empty, and still had enough seats for all but two games a season.

They could knock down your shithole and leave two milk crates and it would easily be enough for you lot but it wouldn't be nice.

I do find it funny that you join in these discussions about capacity when a city fan is hardly going to know much about big crowds except that a big crowd usually gathers on street corners in Exeter when planes fly overhead.

I would stick to regaling us with tales about Jacko and how well he looked back then. Having to take copious amounts of tranquilizers just to be able to make a brief appearance. It's where he started wearing his surgical mask, just as a precaution, and he was never the same afterwards.

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

lawnmowerman wrote:

Tringreen wrote:

Bore off Zyph........

Zyph:
Iggy........Have you personally met and talked to James Brent....I have..... and your comment about asset stripping is so out of order that it is beyond belief...that is not Brent's style at all.

Brents is not a asset striper but he does buy things on the cheap and spends as little as possible. Then sells it on for a large profit. Which is ok when buying up struggling companies but not when its a footy team.

Ps I've Brent twice and looked him in the eyes but I still dont trust him.

I too have looked JB in the eye, met him on numerous occasions but don't 'know' him so can't trust him.

In terms of making a profit well we know he's very good at it - and fair play to him. But it's his way of trampling over people that gets me. The staff and the fans are not as important as making money. If being rich is about shitting on people then leave me poor.

Highwayman likes this, it all comes down to your own principles in life, something JB appears to be lacking in unless it's to his own benifit and that on it's own makes him untrustworthy. I find it hard to believe as things stand that by the time he has finished with his Plymouth crusade that he will be regarded as a saviour or indeed a friend by anyone, he will dump on anyone in his way.

Greenjock wrote:

I do find it funny that you join in these discussions about capacity when a city fan is hardly going to know much about big crowds except that a big crowd usually gathers on street corners in Exeter when planes fly overhead.

Sorry dumb ass, the planes land when they get to Exeter, I guess they don't even bother to fly over 'muff any more.

I'm glad I bored you Tring I live only to help you sleep at night.

Richard Blight above says we had a huge space to build this super stadium in and now we don't. The only flaw I see in that argument is that we had no money or anyone else to actually build it. My argument has never been that we should have a small stand or that we should be that grateful to Brent either. I also don't go along with "his lip quivered" therefore he is an all round good egg. I'm not daft enough to believe he is doing what he is doing for my benefit and not for the profit in it for himself or Company.

What gets me is that any and every straw is grabbed just as long as it supposedly proves he is a complete git even when there isn't any evidence to support it. People want to see evil so therefore it all must be true. I love the comment above saying ZYPH walks away without answering when he doesn't have any. Does GOB come into that category as well then? He told me he had a clue regarding costings then fudged then refused to answer when pressed. Fact is he doesn't have a clue really but likes to present himself as being in the know. The same applies to a number of others. You all take the lower estimate as being nailed on right when you couldn't estimate the cost for one minute yourself. That's the whole point of what I was saying previously.

Instead of just shouting at the moon would it not be better to pick on things that are there to be shouted at? It's legitimate to not trust Brent and even not to like the man. It is legitimate to criticise for his choice of manager and how long he let him stay. It's legitimate to want a bigger stand and content of said stand and ask for details and press for options. It's legitimate to ask for more transparency and fan involvement when it's been promised.

Just one final point. All this paranoid stuff if somebody doesn't agree with the mainstream opinion that they have to be connected to the rabble in the Director's Box. ZYPH is exactly what he says he is. One poster with no multis and no connection to the club but from afar. Just because somebody doesn't sing off your hymn sheet doesn't have to make them a mole and that continual stone throwing is a bit pathetic. Face it, everyone doesn't have to agree with you to post comments.

This,,,,,,,,,,,,,