Now it's Blackmail.

The argument goes something like this:

"Last season Argyle ran at a loss. Mr Brent loaned Argyle the money it needed and all of the development is needed to generate the money to pay back those loans. If the development does not go ahead then the club's future is jeopardised. There is no Plan B."

So much for the "now he's a supporter", the "lip quivering", "only true fans go to see so many games" and "he's got the bug, he really has".

But who set that money losing budget and then ran with it for so long? Brent did.

Who thought the 8000 attendance projections were realistic? Brent did.

Who said that the club was on a sound financial footing right up until it was clear that it was not? Brent did.

So Brent sets a budget based on attendances that nobody, absolutely nobody, would have thought were achievable, was then as a direct result forced to lend the club money that was avoidable and is now using the leverage of those loans as collateral to pressurise the supporters into accepting a scheme that by his own admission is in the interests first and foremost of himself and Mrs Brent. After all it is demonstrably not in Argyle's best interests as things stand.

No, Mr Brent. Just no.

You set a crap budget that you should never have set. You should be covering the short fall in income as result because, against all expectations, attendances actually rose despite yet another season of nightmare followed by nightmare on the pitch. The club has done it's bit by giving you the opportunities to develop, the city council has done its bit by paving the way for you to develop, the fans have done their bit by loyally turning up in quite staggering number given the circumstances.

Now it's time for Brent to do his bit. He should go back to the drawing board and rethink his half-arsed and half-baked plan because it is clear to all that the plan is going to collapse under its own inadequacies. The crazy thing is that his plan isn't so very far away from what would be reasonable: a few more seats in the stand, realistically futureproof the stadium's possibility to expand, build one of the bigger component items somewhere else altogether (Millbay maybe?), re-route the road, remove the school altogether, give the GTs and the FPC venue space in the stand and see revenue from the retail outlets go to the club. None of that is unachievable should Brent wish to do it although he might now only profit personally by £10m instead of £20m out of the venture.

Just as Brent's plan is unacceptable so too is is the moral blackmail we are now experiencing. It is no more than a smokescreen designed to cover Brent's own failure to come up with a sensible business plan for the club and a sensible development plan for Higher Home Park.

blackmail is illegal isnt it? or at least the last act of a desperate man.

Can't argue with that SFD - the fact is there is too much building on a plot not big enough, well to do it properly!! As you say he's one building too many - I suspect the cinema, but of course if he's tapped up the hotel leasees on it all going ahead could be in trouble with that deal to!! Last but not least I've seen on the others site the one thing that could tip this deal over the edge and that is the economy - the £ and perhaps more importantantly the $ could bomb in the near future, then it's tits up all round!! If it gets rejected it will be because the plans aren't right for the site - simple as that!!

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

The argument goes something like this:

"Last season Argyle ran at a loss. Mr Brent loaned Argyle the money it needed and all of the development is needed to generate the money to pay back those loans. If the development does not go ahead then the club's future is jeopardised. There is no Plan B."

The people making that argument are talking rubbish anyway.

Decisions on planning applications aren't all or nothing: they're a process of negotiation. Developer X says 'this is what we want to build' and Council Y say 'well you can build this bit, but we need you to change that bit and also do this extra bit'. Some of it's even written into the relevant legislation - sections 106 and 253 of the Town and Country Planning Act, for example. So when developer X puts in a planning application for 250 houses, s/he might end up with permission to build 220 houses on condition that s/he also builds a children's play area and a new road junction. Both sides know the rules.

Objecting to the HHP plans - whether it's to the whole development or to bits of it - is unlikely to mean the whole thing falls. What it could mean, though, is that when planning permission is granted it's based on changes to what's been submitted.

Fingers crossed.

If this white elephant is given the green light, can it be challenged at a higher level?

The independent site ruler will start to get desperate, his hiking holiday and carpark space depend on keeping the quivering lip sweet.

Brent needs to be gone already.

A budget set on ridiculously high attendances which could only afford a rookie manager, rookie coaching staff and a non-league or youthful strike-force for over half a season ensuring we're near the bottom was no rookie "I know nothing about football" error.

Just pass the keys to AFT and toddle back off to London or wherever you're based. I'm sure BFFs Nool & the sponsor can play auctions and rattle some buckets to repay your avoidable loans in future.

What Brent Actually said!

"It would dramatically affect the ambitions of the club as you do need to generate extra income to enable it to progress,"

"We haven't got a Plan B," he said.

"When we came into the club we said we'd look at putting capital investment in up front to enable it to sustainably move up the leagues, and that's the only plan we're focused on."

It's rare for Brent to say anything at all.

Usually it is the lips of others that move but Brent's words that emerge. He can't be held personally accountable for this rather nasty moral blackmail then, can he?

He's very clever.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

It's rare for Brent to say anything at all.

Usually it is the lips of others that move but Brent's words that emerge. He can't be held personally accountable for this rather nasty moral blackmail then, can he?

He's very clever.

eton boys usually are but not so clever they cant be spotted a mile away.

Here's a Plan B - give Shezza a bigger budget, win football games, be at the top of this shite league at Xmas and watch attendances jump to 9 - 10 k for the promotion run in.

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

Here's a Plan B - give Shezza a bigger budget, win football games, be at the top of this shite league at Xmas and watch attendances jump to 9 - 10 k for the promotion run in.

sounds like a plan A let alone a plan B. get it right on the pitch you watch the attendances grow. Im sure when you were you on the board you noticed a pattern between the team doing well and the team doing bad with the numbers coming to games.

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

Here's a Plan B - give Shezza a bigger budget, win football games, be at the top of this shite league at Xmas and watch attendances jump to 9 - 10 k for the promotion run in.

Don't be silly Damon, that only a thing a real supporter of PAFC would do

There is no need for any of this shite to be built to protect the club, it's all being done so the banker can pocket a few more million to the pension fund.
Personally I would rather see none of it, but if there was a need for development then to me only one building needs to be built. No plan B what utter shite I'm no genius but even I could come up with an alternative.
Why not just build the ice rink to a better level i.e. more seating to truly provide an arena to be proud. It was stated that this would be able to be converted for conferences and basketball. If done properly this could also be used as a concert venue, and I know about the Pavilions, but this venue is hardly a world beater. This could also hold multiple conferences if designed correctly. Plus I don't see a problem with having two venues meaning more entertainment possibilities. It could also incorporate the food and drink outlets which could also double up as a social club, generating more income.
Other clubs can manage without the other buildings so why can't we?

mcfry wrote:

There is no need for any of this shite to be built to protect the club, it's all being done so the banker can pocket a few more million to the pension fund.
Personally I would rather see none of it, but if there was a need for development then to me only one building needs to be built. No plan B what utter shite I'm no genius but even I could come up with an alternative.
Why not just build the ice rink to a better level i.e. more seating to truly provide an arena to be proud. It was stated that this would be able to be converted for conferences and basketball. If done properly this could also be used as a concert venue, and I know about the Pavilions, but this venue is hardly a world beater. This could also hold multiple conferences if designed correctly. Plus I don't see a problem with having two venues meaning more entertainment possibilities. It could also incorporate the food and drink outlets which could also double up as a social club, generating more income.
Other clubs can manage without the other buildings so why can't we?

Other clubs fans wouldnt stand for this and would fight and ensure the clubs interests where protected first before a bulldozer turned up.

SFD....I think you are getting carried away again as you do once in a while.The new grandstand with a far greater corporate area than at present will be the catalyst that drives the club forward.I've done corporate at many grounds across the country and we happen to do it rather well,in comparison to other grounds that I have visited.

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

be at the top of this shite league .

Would that be the same shiite league you've managed to survive in by an average of half a point each season ?

Big ideas from the same pack of bitches but as usual, totally fooking deluded.

Brent and his money is the only thing keeping you going, FFS show the man some respect.

We seem to have done 'Corporate' so well in the past that Newell had to step in and book tables full of his Pasoti mates. Is Pasoti a corporation?

Mind you.... With Nap's snout in the directors trough I didn't see him rallying the farm to do "corporate" so much last season!

Lord Tisdale wrote:

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

be at the top of this shite league .

Would that be the same shiite league you've managed to survive in by an average of half a point each season ?

Big ideas from the same pack of bitches but as usual, totally fooking deluded.

Brent and his money is the only thing keeping you going, FFS show the man some respect.

excuse me but did you show uri geller and michael jackson respect when they saved your club?

Tis - we've had an inexperienced Board and an inexperienced manager. We now have a manager that can do this - give him half a chance to bring in the players he wants and we'll be up there next season. Form is temporary, class is permanent and compared to your joke of a club we are sheer class.

Angry wrote:

Lord Tisdale wrote:

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

be at the top of this shite league .

Would that be the same shiite league you've managed to survive in by an average of half a point each season ?

Big ideas from the same pack of bitches but as usual, totally fooking deluded.

Brent and his money is the only thing keeping you going, FFS show the man some respect.

excuse me but did you show uri geller and michael jackson respect when they saved your club?

We saved our own club feck nuts, you pack of bitches just bellied up as always.

Lord Tisdale wrote:

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

be at the top of this shite league .

Would that be the same shiite league you've managed to survive in by an average of half a point each season ?

Big ideas from the same pack of bitches but as usual, totally fooking deluded.

Brent and his money is the only thing keeping you going, FFS show the man some respect.

tizzy you rightwing nasties are soooooooooooooooo bitter

Quality debating style Tis, bitches, wish I'd thought of that, WUM.

Iggy wrote:

Quality debating style Tis, bitches, wish I'd thought of that, WUM.

No other word for it Iggers, you bitches just bitch on and on and on about the same old shiite, just a bunch of Billy Big Bolloxers who haven't accepted that you are now the shiite of Devon and should be grateful for whatever small mercies Brent has given you.

Lord Tisdale wrote:

Iggy wrote:

Quality debating style Tis, bitches, wish I'd thought of that, WUM.

No other word for it Iggers, you bitches just bitch on and on and on about the same old shiite, just a bunch of Billy Big Bolloxers who haven't accepted that you are now the shiite of Devon and should be grateful for whatever small mercies Brent has given you.

We may be the shite of Devon in your eyes but we're the only team in Devon to have played in the championship and the only one that has never been non league.......